BS: War in Georgia (2008)

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 07:04 PM

An independent Cornwall, I like it!


                  But Alabama tried that twice before. The first time they had to deal with US Grant, and the second time they had to deal with MLK Jr.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:44 PM

""Do you mean the ones who have left and are happy, such as Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, or do you mean the unhappy areas which can't leave such as Chechnya?""

Whatever!

But it does make me wonder whether the Americans here would consider that Alabama should have the same right to self determination that they would advocate for, say Chechnya, or is it only right when it's happening to the "other side"?

Ditto, the Brits. Should Cornwall have the right to freedom from UK rule?

I assure you, it's a serious question, not trolling for controversy. I am wondering where our conception of the rights of others runs out of steam, and more importantly WHY?

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:32 PM

Big lesson seems to be that Russia is energy independent, but USA not, and that if it be true that USA's modern military machine could defeat the Russian military machine, the USA either cannot or will not (maybe because of energy fears) use it. The looks like Russia rolls out over the rest of Asia and Europe to me until the Chinese stop it if they can.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:31 PM

"...favour the secession of all these East European enclaves..."

Do you mean the ones who have left and are happy, such as Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, or do you mean the unhappy areas which can't leave such as Chechnya?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:17 PM

It suddenly occurred to me to ask what may seem an impertinent question, but I assure you I am genuinely curious as to the response.

Can any of those who favour the secession of all these East European enclaves tell me what their reaction would be if the same thing happened in their own neck of the woods?

How about if Alabama seceded from the US, or Cornwall declared independence from the UK?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 05:51 PM

THANK GOD THANK GOD

We were getting tired of AlQada anyway,
now Russia as our good old cold war enemy (with some really GOOD nukes) should whip us all back into submission to our Republican war machine Via the only true miltary master JOHN MC CAIN"T.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 05:45 PM

By the way, here is some background on Abkhazia...

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11670692

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID/RMOI-6BT2W3?OpenDocument

"In 1992, Abkhaz separatists and Georgian national army began a war that lasted two years, with sporadic violence continuing until 1999, displacing all ethnic groups within Abkhazia. Both militaries were responsible for targeting the other's ethnic population by burning villages and destroying buildings and farm land. According to the Soviet government census of 1989, the pre-war population in Abkhazia was 525,000, 45% of which were classified as ethnic Georgians and 18% classified as ethnic Abkhazians. Post-war Abkhazia is 80-90% ethnic Abkhazian with the rest comprised of a mixed Abkhaz-Georgian population and some 30,000 Georgians on the border who return for harvesting during times of security.

While the numbers of displaced people is controversial and disputed by both sides, some conclusions have been reached. The largest number of displaced were ethnic Georgians. In addition, between 1992 and 1993 approximately 75,000 Russians and 75,000 Armenians fled to Russia, while close to 15,000 Greeks returned to Greece after centuries in Abkhazia. Ethnic Abkhazians also became internally displaced during the prolonged conflict."


The people who fled to Russia, Albania, and Greece were not necessarily fleeing from Abkhazians. Most likely, they were simply fleeing the conflict area.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 05:33 PM

Georgia doesn't have a very long history of being and independent state within the boundaries it now occupies. There was a kingdom of Georgia from the 11th century until the 15th century, which broke up into several kingdoms and principalities in the 16th century. From 1918 to 1921, there was an Independent Republic of Georgia. After the break up of the Soviet Union, Georgia simply declared its independence. The current Georgia has existed since 1991.

Georgia is in no more of a position to force South Ossetia to remain a part of Georgia than Russia is to claim Georgia as a part of Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 05:16 PM

Actually, they may have done something similar. They gave away Russian citizenship to any Ossetian who wanted it. That way the Russian tanks can be said to be protecting Russian citizens from those big bullies in Georgia. Sounds a bit like Hitler claiming to be protecting enthnic Germans from persecution in Poland. Slightly updated scam, but similar.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 05:01 PM

They should learn from Kosovo and move a bunch more Russians into South Ossetia, and then vote for independance. Later, they can vote again to join Russia.

                The west seems to like that arrangement.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 04:48 PM

CarolC – "People who deny the right of South Ossetia to break away from Georgia, but who uphold Georgia's right to break away from Russia are engaging in hypocrisy."

Can you tell us all exactly when it was that Georgia "broke away" from Russia? The USSR was made up of a number of independent republics – Georgia was one of them. When the Communist System in Russia collapsed the Republics were free to go their own separate ways. The borders of the United Soviet Socialist Republic of Georgia were determined by the Communists sometime around 1921, Abkhazia and South Ossetia lay within those boundaries. I asked earlier if the wishes and desires of the Ossetian people meant anything to the Russians, why was there never a United Soviet Socialist Republic of Ossetia? If the cause being supported by Russia is so laudable why did they not support the Ossetians in Georgia in 1990? When the circumstances were exactly the same? Oh wait a minute they weren't oil was not $115 per barrel, Russia was exporting very little of it and the BTC Pipeline had not been constructed. I supposed Chechnya will get "Independence" next Eh?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Ron Davies
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 04:21 PM

From Wikipedia:   "In December 1990 the Supreme Soviet of Georgia abolished the autonomous Ossetian enclave....Violent conflict broke ouat towards the end of 1991, during which many South Ossetian villages were attacked and burned as well as Georgian houses and schools in Tskhinvali, the capital of South Ossetia...As a result approximately 1,000 died and 100,000 ethnic Ossetians fled the territory and Georgia proper."

To be continued

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 04:16 PM

You're arguing like a lawyer, pdq. A lawyer argues for the written letter, but not the spirit of the law. This is okay if you think that laws written down by someone on a piece of paper are more important than people's real concerns and human rights, and more important than reality. It's hypocritical in the extreme.

It is the foundation of most political chicanery and hypocrisy.

The reality, regardless of who the hell in the world officially recognizes what about South Ossetia, is that the South Ossetians do not want to be part of Georgia, they have fought for independence from Georgian and won it, they have been openly attacked by Georgia now, and Georgia is in the wrong to have done that. If the majority of the South Ossetian population wants to leave Georgia and join Russia, you have nothing to say about it and the USA has nothing to say about it, because it's none of your business. It's their business.

The Georgians blew it. Tough. They made a serious error.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 04:08 PM

It doesn't matter whether or not South Ossetia's independence from Georgia has any international recognition. What matters is what the South Ossetians recognize.

And by the way, what the South Ossetians want is to unite with North Ossetia, which is an automomous republic in the Russian Federation. They have every right to do this if that's what they want.

If some people think that only some peoples have a right to independence and others don't, they are engaging in hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:49 PM

...from a reasonable authority:


"The independence of South Ossetia is not recognized by any other international organization or country, who regard the region, formerly an autonomous oblast within the Georgian SSR, an integral part of the Georgian state. The previous independence referendum, held by the South Ossetian separatists on January 19, 1992, failed to gain any international recognition, since it occurred in the atmosphere of post-war chaos and violated the territorial integrity of the Republic of Georgia recognized by the international community within the borders of the Georgian SSR."

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:31 PM

South Ossetia fought a civil war with Georgia and won. I think the South Ossetians have something to say about whether or not they are a part of Georgia. They want Russia to help them maintain their independence from Georgia. If they want Russia to remain in South Ossetia for this purpose, that's their right. Nobody has a right to force them to remain a part of Georgia if they don't want to, any more than Russia had a right to force Georgia to remain a part of Russia.

People who deny the right of South Ossetia to break away from Georgia, but who uphold Georgia's right to break away from Russia are engaging in hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Stringsinger
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:24 PM

John McCain's accomplice has ties to Georgia's oil. Scheunemann Helped U.S. Firm Win Georgian Energy Deals While Lobbying For Georgia's NATO Membership
Randy Scheunemann is a registered representative of the Government of Georgia in the United States. Accordingly, Mr. Scheunemann has developed a very close relationship with President of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili and many senior Georgian officials. The WSE team has also begun negotiating possible deals with the Georgian state-run oil company, National Oil Company of Georgia, to assist in the development of Georgia's hydrocarbon industry.

It's about oil again! Bush is there.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:16 PM

This may sound like a repeat but here goes: North Ossetia, South Ossetia and Abhkazia are internationally recognised as regions within the sovereign country of Georgia. These areas were part of the old Soviet Union and the boundries were freely negotiated around 1990. Russia signed the agreements as did the newly-created government of Georgia.

If changes in these territorial boundries must be made, they will be made by free negotiations, not by military force of subversion. Russia: go home.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:07 PM

I was watching a video of a Russian government official that I found rather interesting. He was saying that the government of Georgia and western countries like the US are trying to draw comparisons with the Russian government of today and Stalin. He found that highly ironic in light of the fact that Stalin and one of his top generals were both Georgians.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:03 PM

Perhaps it's ethnic cleansing of the South Ossetians that Georgia (and the US) has in mind.

As I said, There is a huge difference between raising the possibility of something and making an accusation. I'll explain how it works for those who don't understand English. "Perhaps" means that something is possible. An accusation would be someone saying someone did do something or is doing something. Raising the possibility that someone might be doing something is not an accusation. It is only speculating about the possibility.

This is why I haven't commented on Russia's accusations that Georgia has committed genocide, and I won't unless I see independent verification of it.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: gnu
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:51 PM

Yo.... GUEST... re your post :

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:34 PM

If you don't provide details in that post like I just did for yours, piss off.

It's just common courtesy and common sense. I don't have your kind of time. Be a little more thoughtful, please.

Of course, if you cannot, yer just an asshole troll.

Oh yeah, could you at least pick a name so we know who is... you know.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:36 PM

For both sides to stop would obviously be the wise (and humanitarian) thing to do.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:31 PM

"some people pretend to care about human rights, but they really only do so when it helps their agendas."

Yeah. ;-) That is the standard routine just about everywhere and with just about everyone (specially politicians and political commentators). It's an old story. If drawing attention to crime and injustice serves their cause, they will yell about it all the livelong day. If it doesn't, they will either ignore it or deny that it is even happening or make excuses for why it should be happening.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:30 PM

*someone keeps saying

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:29 PM

Some keeps saying that I have "accused" Georgia of ethnic cleansing. As usual, this person is lying. I have not accused anyone of ethnic cleansing. If this person would care to go back and actually read the post, they might see what I actually did say. There is a huge difference between raising the possibility of something and making an accusation.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:25 PM

And by the way, despite what one fiction writer has said in this thread, I have not mentioned Abkhazia in any of my posts.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:21 PM

Did you wait to see verification when you accused the Georgians, based on South Ossetian sources?


You insist on verification of the Georgian claims.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:19 PM

Side I dislike? I never had an opinion about Georgia in my entire life. I was more inclined to dislike Russia for what it has done to the Chechnyans than I was to even think about Georgia at all. I didn't even know about South Ossetia until this conflict broke out a few days ago.

My comment about ethnic cleansing was based on accounts from South Ossetians about the way they were treated by the Georgian military.

On the other hand, I notice that some people pretend to care about human rights, but they really only do so when it helps their agendas.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:11 PM

"I think I'll wait until I see some independently verified reports before I comment on that. "

Did you wait to see verification when you accused the Georgians, based on South Ossetian sources?

Or does this only apply to the side you dislike, as usual?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:10 PM

Most of the South Ossetians want to be incorporated into Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Volgadon
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:09 PM

As an entirely autonomous republic (in internal affairs), like Kalmykia.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:08 PM

I'd like to see the source of those census numbers.

The reports I'm seeing are saying that the Georgian government's accusations of ethnic cleansing cannot be independently verified. I think I'll wait until I see some independently verified reports before I comment on that.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:03 PM

"Independence (of South Ossetia) is not the desired result, incorporation into Russia is the aim."

Yes, most likely it is. After all, the Russians have issued Russian passports to the Ossetians, have they not? From the point of view of the South Ossetians, it sounds like they would be wise to incorporate themselves into Russia at this point.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:01 PM

Russian troops and paramilitaries rolled into the strategic Georgian city of Gori on Wednesday, apparently violating a truce designed to end the conflict that has uprooted tens of thousands and scarred the Georgian landscape.

Georgian officials said Gori, a central hub on Georgia's main east-west highway, was looted and bombed by the Russians before they left later in the day.

Moscow denied the accusations, but it appeared to be on a technicality: a BBC reporter in Gori reported that Russians tanks were in the streets as their South Ossetian separatist allies seized Georgian cars, looted Georgian homes and then set some homes ablaze.

"Russia Other Top Headlines Photos

Russian troops roll into key Georgian city
100

has treacherously broken its word," Georgia's Security Council chief Alexander Lomaia said Wednesday in Tbilisi, the capital.

An AP reporter saw dozens of trucks and armored vehicles leaving Gori, roaring southeast. Soldiers waved at journalists and one soldier jokingly shouted to a photographer: "Come with us, beauty, we're going to Tbilisi!"

But the convoy turned north and left the highway about an hour's drive from the Georgian capital, and set up camp a mile off the road. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russian troops were near Gori to secure weapons left behind by the Georgians.

To the west, Russian-backed Abkhazian separatists pushed Georgian troops out of Abkhazia and even moved into Georgian territory itself, defiantly planting a flag over the Inguri River and laughing that retreating Georgians had received "American training in running away."

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Volgadon
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 11:43 AM

BB, I don't have the time to go into it right now, but those census results aren't quite what you make them out to be.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 11:26 AM

Sounds more like ya made the tooth doctor mad.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: heric
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 11:19 AM

Irredentist: any position advocating annexation of territories administered by another state on the grounds of common ethnicity or prior historical possession, actual or alleged.

Word of the day.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 11:18 AM

1979 Census 486,082(Total)
213,322(Georgians) 83,087(Abkhazians) 79,730(Russians) 73,350(Armenians) 13,642(Greeks)
1989 Census 525,061(Total)
239,872(Georgians) 93,267(Abkhazians) 74,913(Russians) 76,541(Armenians) 14,664(Greeks)
2003 Census 215,972(Total)
45,953(Georgians) 94,606(Abkhazians) 23,420(Russians) 44,870(Armenians) 1,486(Greeks)


Hmmm... I guess those evil Georgians have struck again.

Comments, CarolC?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 11:09 AM

On "ethnic cleansing"

South Ossetia has always been and remains roughly 65-70% Ossetian and 30-35% Georgian. CarolC made the claim that the South Ossetians had been largely self-sufficient and independent since the early 1990's. Fact is the area and the people are as poor as church mice and no-one has ever really cared two figs about them. Their only source of income stems from customs duties for goods passing through a tunnel on the main trunk road between Russia and Tblisi. Far from being largely self-sufficient they have been subsidised to the hilt directly by Russia. There is absolutely no way on God's earth that South Ossetia could ever be "Independent". Independence is not the desired result incorporation into Russia is the aim. The parallel with the German take-over of the Sudatenland in 1938 is frighteningly similar.

Now Abkhazia is a completely different story:

1926 Census 186,004(Total) 67,494(Georgians) 55,918(Abkhazians) 12,553(Russians) 25,677(Armenians) 14,045(Greeks)
1939 Census 311,885(Total) 91,967(Georgians) 56,197(Abkhazians) 60,201(Russians) 49,705(Armenians) 34,621(Greeks)
1959 Census 404,738(Total) 158,221(Georgians) 61,193(Abkhazians) 86,715(Russians) 64,425(Armenians) 9,101(Greeks)
1970 Census 486,959(Total) 199,596(Georgians) 77,276(Abkhazians) 92,889(Russians) 74,850(Armenians) 13,114(Greeks)
1979 Census 486,082(Total) 213,322(Georgians) 83,087(Abkhazians) 79,730(Russians) 73,350(Armenians) 13,642(Greeks)
1989 Census 525,061(Total) 239,872(Georgians) 93,267(Abkhazians) 74,913(Russians) 76,541(Armenians) 14,664(Greeks)
2003 Census 215,972(Total) 45,953(Georgians) 94,606(Abkhazians) 23,420(Russians) 44,870(Armenians) 1,486(Greeks)

Now as CarolC pointed out both Abkhazia and South Ossetia fought for "independence" from Georgia in 1990-91. Looking at the census figures for 1989 and 2003 reveals what CarolC? Ethnic Cleansing of Georgians, Armenians and Greeks (I can understand why the Russian population of the area would drop after the collapse of the USSR, they simply returned home) What are the "Rights of Return" here CarolC and what would be the result of any referendum if one were held after they had returned?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 10:52 AM

"Saakashvili said Russia had more sinister aims than to gain control of the two disputed provinces.

"Georgia is the first test case," he said. "It was chosen first because it was a very successful democracy. We had the highest economic growth rate here, we have freedom of press, civil society."

At a rally Tuesday, Saakashvili was joined by the leaders of five former Soviet bloc states — Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Ukraine — who also spoke out against Russian domination.

"Our neighbor thinks it can fight us. We are telling it no," said Polish President Lech Kaczynski"

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 09:47 AM

No offense taken Leadbelly. I perhaps was not clear on my position. I support none of these leaders and bemoan the cost of human suffering involved. Brinkmanship is game where the leaders are not usually found on the firing line.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 08:52 AM

Russian convoy heads into Georgia, violating truce
Wednesday, August 13, 2008 12:30:51 PM
By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA and MISHA DZHINDZHIKHASHVILI

A Russian military convoy thrust deep into Georgia on Wednesday and Georgian officials said Russian troops bombed and looted the crossroads city of Gori, violating a freshly brokered truce intended to end the conflict.

In the west, Georgia's weakened military acknowledged its soldiers had pulled out entirely from Abkhazia, leaving both breakaway regions at the heart of the fighting in the hands of Russian-backed separatists.

Even as the Russian troops moved deep into Georgian territory from the separatist region of South Ossetia, a few dozen fighters from Abkhazia offered their own brazen challenge, planting their flag on a bridge over the Inguri River -- outside the rebel territory.

"The border has been along this river for 1,000 years," separatist official Ruslan Kishmaria told AP on Wednesday. He said Georgia would have to accept the new border and taunted the departed Georgian forces by saying they had received "American training in running away."

An AP reporter saw several dozen Russian military trucks and armored vehicles speeding out of Gori and heading south, further from the breakaway province of South Ossetia.

Soldiers waved at journalists and one soldier shouted to a photographer takning shots of the convoy: "Come with us, beauty, we're going to Tbilisi." Gori is about a 90-minute drive from the Georgian capital.

The developments came less than 12 hours after Georgia's president said he accepted a cease-fire plan intended to end the fighting that bloodied and battered the U.S. ally and uprooted an estimated 100,000 people.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that Russia was halting military action because Georgia had paid enough for its attack on South Ossetia, a separatist region along the Russian border with close ties to Moscow.

....

Georgia's Security Council chief Alexander Lomaia said that Russia had moved 50 tanks into Gori, a strategic town 15 miles from the border with South Ossetia, violating the new accord.

"Russia has treacherously broken its word," Lomaia said.

Russia's deputy chief of General Staff Col.-Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn denied any tanks were in Gori. He said Russians went into the city to try to implement the truce with local Georgian officials but could not find any.




So, who is lying? The AP reporters and photographers? Or Russia?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:55 AM

Washington Post

Another Hard Landing for Russia?

By Eugene Rumer
Wednesday, August 13, 2008; Page A15

Russia's victory in Georgia is payback for years of geopolitical irrelevance, for Moscow's retreat from Eastern Europe and from the Soviet Union, for Western finger-wagging at Russian transgressions at home and abroad. Russia is back: Its gross domestic product has increased from $200 billion in 1999 to $1.2 trillion in 2007. Moscow has more money from oil and gas exports than it knows what to do with.

The Russian military is showing off its newfound strength, punishing the Georgians for their sins, the greatest of which is forgetting in whose back yard they live. Moscow has warned Poland and the Czech Republic not to deploy U.S. missile defense components on their territories. The Kremlin has also told Washington that it should mind its own business.

We have seen something like this before, though. Thirty years ago, flush with oil and gas revenue, the Soviet Union was threatening Europe and challenging the United States. In 1979, Soviet tanks rolled into Afghanistan and seemed poised to keep going to fulfill centuries-old Russian ambitions of reaching the warm waters of the Indian Ocean. The West could do nothing to stop Moscow's juggernaut unless it was willing to risk nuclear annihilation.

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan drove the final nail into the coffin of detente -- a policy of tentative East-West rapprochement. It also marked the start of one of the frostiest chapters in the Cold War saga, which ended with the Soviet Union's collapse. A decade later, there would be no more Warsaw Pact. Europe would be sending humanitarian aid to Russia. The Soviet military would be defeated in Afghanistan. What caused all that? We are still not quite sure. The war in Afghanistan, excessive military spending, reliance on oil and gas exports for revenue, failure to reform the Soviet economy, and the lack of outlets for domestic opposition are all high on the list of regular suspects.


Fast-forward to 2008. Russia is riding high, making up for all that was lost in preceding decades. U.S. and European leaders are flummoxed by how to punish the rising giant that they also badly need -- to feed our oil addiction, to help us cut a deal with Iran and to go on buying our currency to keep its value from sliding further. But who is to say that Russia's victory in Georgia will not lead to another disaster in a few years?

There is plenty of trouble brewing in Russia, not unlike the trouble to which Moscow turned a blind eye 30 years ago, as its tanks rolled into Afghanistan and caused a break in relations with the West. The vast Russian military can crush Georgia's army of 35,000. But Russia's own North Caucasus region, just across the border from Georgia, has been a simmering cauldron for nearly two decades. The conditions in Russia look different from the conditions of 30 years ago, but Russia's reality is still grim. Moscow may have more billionaires than other European capitals, but the Russian population is still shrinking, the average Russian man is not expected to live past 60, oil still dominates the country's economic future, and the taps are running dry.

No matter how the current crisis is resolved, the consequences for East-West (that Cold War term again) relations will be far-reaching. The stain on Russia's reputation in the West will not be erased for years. It will take a very different -- and most improbable -- Russian attitude to repair the damage.

In the meantime, could it be that Russia, petro-confident and irredentist, seeking to reverse the record of the past two decades, is careering toward another 1989 or 1991? Will it heed the lessons of the Soviet era? What will happen if it does not? Will the North Caucasus break out of Moscow's grip? Will the Far East turn into a Chinese colony? Will the West once again confront the prospect of Moscow's former satrapies suddenly becoming major nuclear powers? Will the specter of Russian "loose nukes" keep haunting the West?

It will take skill and patience to get Russia to a soft landing from its present high. Moscow's record at soft landings is not good. The consequences of it landing hard will be felt far beyond its borders. We should be thinking about that, even if the Russians are not.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:29 AM

1. Radio reports that the Georgian government was under cyber attack from Russian sources "several weeks" before the present incursion by Georgia into Ossetia.


2. Now who is invading whom?

Georgia says Russian tanks violate truce

Wednesday, August 13, 2008 9:40:39 AM
By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA and MISHA DZHINDZHIKHASHVILI

Georgian officials charged Wednesday that Russian tanks had rolled into a strategic city and seized a military base inside Georgia in violation of a freshly brokered truce intended to end a conflict that had bloodied and battered the U.S. ally and uprooted tens of thousands of people.

The accusation came less than 12 hours after Georgia's president said he accepted a cease-fire plan brokered by France. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that Russia was halting military action because Georgia had paid enough for its attack on South Ossetia, a separatist region along the Russian border with close ties to Moscow.

Still, Medvedev ordered the Russian defense minister at a televised Kremlin meeting to destroy any resistance or aggressive actions.

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili had gambled on a surprise attack late Thursday to regain control over his country's pro-Russian breakaway province of South Ossetia. Instead, Georgia suffered a punishing beating from Russian tanks and aircraft that has left the country with even less control over territory than it had before.

In the newest development, Georgia's Security Council chief Alexander Lomaia said that Russia had moved 50 tanks into Gori, a strategic town 15 miles from the border with South Ossetia, violating the new accord. The RIA-Novosti news agency cited the Russian Defense Ministry as denying the claim.

Georgian Interior Ministry spokesman Zurab Gvenetadze said that Russian forces seized a military base on the outskirts of Gori, situated on Georgia's only significant east-west road.

Russian troops previously had moved to near Gori, but were not in the city when the truce was announced, Georgian officials said.

Lomaia said that Russian troops also held onto ground in western Georgia, maintaining control of the town of Zugdidi where they seized the central police station and government buildings and saddling the main highway in the region. He said there had been no fresh clashes since the truce.

Georgia said Wednesday its troops have withdrawn from the only area of the breakaway province of Abkhazia they still occupied in the face of a Russian offensive there. Temur Yakobashvili, Georgian's minister for reintegration, said that Georgian troops had left the area known as the Kodori Gorge.

A Russian general on Tuesday asserted the Georgians had been driven out but by separatist forces and not by the Russian military. On Tuesday, an Associated Press reporter witnessed about 135 Russian military vehicles heading toward the gorge.

Saakashvili said Russia's aim all along was not to gain control of two disputed provinces but to "destroy" the smaller nation, a former Soviet state and current U.S. ally.

Russia accused Georgia of killing more than 2,000 people, mostly civilians, in South Ossetia. The claim couldn't be independently confirmed, but witnesses who fled the area over the weekend said hundreds had died.

The overall death toll was expected to rise because large areas of Georgia were still too dangerous for journalists to enter and see the true scope of the damage.

Georgia's Health Minister Alexander Kvitashvili said Wednesday that 175 Georgians had died in five days of air and ground attacks that left homes in smoldering ruins. He said many died Tuesday in a Russian raid of Gori just hours before Medvedev declared fighting halted.

An AP reporter also saw heavy damage inflicted to a Georgian village near Gori by a raid which the villagers said came only half-hour before Russian television broadcast Medvedev's statement. Two men and a woman in the village of Ruisi, in undisputed Georgian territory just outside South Ossetia, were killed and another five were wounded.

"I always hide in the basement," said one villager, 70-year old Vakhtang Chkhekvadze, as he was picking away what was left of a window frame torn by an explosion. "But this time the explosion came so abruptly, I don't remember what happened afterward."

The first relief flight from the U.N. refugee agency arrived in Georgia as the number of people uprooted by the conflict neared 100,000. Thousands streamed into the capital.

Those left behind in devastated regions of Georgia cowered in rat-infested cellars or wandered nearly deserted cities.

Georgia, which is pushing for NATO membership, borders the Black Sea between Turkey and Russia and was ruled by Moscow for most of the two centuries preceding the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union.

South Ossetia and Abkhazia have run their own affairs without international recognition since fighting to split from Georgia in the early 1990s. Both separatist provinces are backed by Russia, which appears open to absorbing them.

Medvedev said Georgia must allow the provinces to decide whether they want to remain part of Georgia. He said Russian peacekeepers would stay in both provinces, even as Saakashvili said his government will officially designate them as occupying forces.

Georgia sits on a strategic oil pipeline carrying Caspian crude to Western markets and bypassing Russia. The British oil company BP shut down one of three Georgian pipelines, saying it was a precaution.

------

Associated Press writers Christopher Torchia reported from Zugdidi, Georgia, and near the Kodori Gorge. Misha Dzhindzhikhashvili from Tbilisi, Georgia. David Nowak in Tbilisi; Sergei Grits in Ruisi, Georgia; Douglas Birch in Tskhinvali, Georgia; Jim Heintz, Vladimir Isachenkov, Lynn Berry and Angela Charlton in Moscow; Pauline Jelinek and Lolita C. Baldor in Washington and John Heilprin at the United Nations contributed to this report.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Leadbelly
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 05:13 AM

Sandy: I'm sorry...

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Joy Bringer
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 02:09 AM

Well the message to Georgia must be stop the sniping and winging on television and accept their actions recently caused the deaths of their own nationals. Russia will not be messed around by a dot of a country who run to the west every time they don't get their own way.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 01:07 AM

Yes, I get your point, heric, and it's a worthy one. I feel that the main impetus for a war against Iran is coming from the USA and the UK, but undoubtedly there are other voices chiming in as well.

pdq - I am by no means convinced that the Iranians are building any nuclear weapons. Neither am I convinced that they are not. I simply don't know. If they were building any, I would consider it enormously unlikely that they would attack Israel first with those weapons and guarantee their own destruction...because I don't think they're insane. You obviously do think they're insane, and that's why we have different expectations in that regard.

I think that if Iran had 10 or 20 nukes ready right now...and the means to deliver them...that Iran, Israel, and the American fleet and everyone else around there would be a lot safer than they are now, because no one would dare start a regional war under those conditions.

You don't think so, because you think they're insane. Well, it's very convenient to imagine that your "enemy" is insane when you are yourself planning to commit a violent and insane act of unprovoked aggression against him, isn't it? It makes it "okay". What a sad line of reasoning.

Saddam wasn't insane either. He was a criminal dictator, but he wasn't insane, he was quite pragmatic. I think the Iranians are probably pragmatic too. They have to be, because they're outgunned by the USA/UK and Israel. But the USA always loves painting their next chosen "enemy" (victim) as being led by someone who is "insane", because that apparently justifies the USA launching a pre-emptive strike. I regard it as doubletalk, meant to get the American public onside. Scare your people into supporting unprovoked aggression against someone, then do it.

That was the deal in Iraq. I expect that will be the deal in Iran too.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 09:30 PM

Well, from the way things are going in Georgia, it looks like they ought to let the president of France deal with it.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 08:26 PM

Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. As Saddam found out, breaking treaties (in his case, the one he signed at Safwan) can have serious consquences. The Iraniam Islamic terrorist government must be dealt with soon. One Iranian nuke is too many.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: RobbieWilson
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 08:20 PM

That leaves Iran from whom? the guys with the black hats? The Indians? The guys whose asses we said we would whup so that little countries don't stand against our view of the world?

It seems to me fairly obvious that the only way towards a peaceful future is when the rich and powerful lead us away from flexing military muscles. When we strengthen the UN rather than bully small nations into support and then when we still don't convince enough people there say "fuck it! We are strong enough to go ahead anyway."

When we begin to treat the lives of all the little people in the world as significant and support the principles of law order, human rights and due process.

The concept of teaching the population (as opposed to the military) a lesson wasn't invented by the Georgian Air Force, or the Russians if you think that is what they have been doing, it has been used by the rich and powerful since time began. The march of civilisation is the march away from Shock and Awe, away from torture, detention without trial, arming and training the enemy of my enemy, talking up democracy when they vote the way we like but supporting dictatorships like the Saudi Royal family when they grease our palms.

Yes it's all very well to condemn the leaders of Georgia, South Ossetia or Russia but the real change in attitudes needs to come in the people around us so that those who take decisions in our name know we are bothered about what is done on our behalf. When you throw the big stones it is foolish to moan about the harm the rippples do.